Most of the people that are trying to get gains from "software" on these cars are wanting a supercharger but cannot afford one.

There is very little gains in AFR manipulation on these cars.

There are enough poser clients for both Powerchip and Gintani and ESS and any other tuner with magic dyno graphs.

If you are taking this car to a 1/4 mile strip and call that "the track" ...you might be a poser... and you bought the wrong car.

Software tuning on this car is silly. They re-map the throttle response so you "feel" like your getting more power.

If i spent $12k on a e92m3 in suspension (4-way Sachs Motorsport) and another guy spent $12k on a supercharger on his e92m3 with stock supension and we had a pro driver lap both cars around a "real" race track (road course) on the same day - the suspension car would come in at a better time - what does that tell you??

Dyno's have to contend with too many variables to be accurate.
Thats why manuf dont use them. They use engine dynos.... so do "real race teams"
V-Box is a more accurate way to read a cars "real world" performance... and should be used if your wanting a true AFR tune .... although you need to be at a race track or 1/4 mile strip.

Ive heard good and bad things about ALL vendors - and ive never received services from either Powerchip or Gintani/OE Tuning. But i can tell you this:
- Based on the conduct of some Gintani/OE customers in this andother threads, it turns me off to going to Gintani for 'anything' ...in case one or two of their douchy customer/fanbois might be there.
- Based on how much time and effort Powerchip's "representatives" spend on bashing the others products and services ...turns me off to Powerchip ... = spend more time improving and proving your own products and services ...and dont worry about other companies and what they do ... if your product is superior ...they will come.

1st: I'm not affiliated with powerchip, ESS, AA, GIAC, etc. While I'm not free of all bias (if anything, it used to be towards Gintani), I think I'm about as objective as you're likely to find.

2nd: As Evolve mentioned, Jeremy @ Gintani's impressive list of graphs still left out some manipulatable factors. Personally I'd just like to see the correction factors for each run -- graphed if possible (since their own screenshots displayed a certain fondness for photo editing software).

3rd: I apologize for not being as clear as I could have been in my initial post. I see now that many people looked at this graph:

...and thought "Hmm... That is unusual but it doesn't prove anything."

To those people: The probability of this "unusual" distribution occurring naturally is 0.003% (0.00003). In a world with few absolutes, I'll call this proof:

Yesterday I received a call from Alex at Gintani and he was clearly upset about this thread (which I wasn't even aware of yet). Alex offered that if I brought my car there, he would put it on the dyno and let me operate it to see if I could skew the numbers upward or downward. Alex told me that his dyno couldn’t be manipulated, but I would be welcome to “run his dyno” and show him how to do it. I accepted the challenge and made contact with a professional very well versed in Dyno Dynamics dynamometers, because I was unfamiliar with that software.

Along the way to Gintani, I picked up a friend of mine to be a witness to all of the events. When we arrived there was naturally some animosity already built up.” After Jeremy was finished yelling insults at me, Alex came out and went to the dyno computer. He was playing around with it and then challenged me to show him how the dyno could be manipulated. Before arriving at Gintani, I had been coached by the Dyno Dynamics expert, but I couldn't remember exactly what he told me. I called him back and received instructions on what to press to access the Dyno weather station and calibration screens, along with instructions on which values to alter to manipulate the dyno results exactly as we've seen posted in this thread.

I pressed "A" and entered the weather station and calibration screen. The instructions given to me said to turn the weather station off, and then press apply. After doing that, I changed the barometric pressure to 28 from 29.39 and hit apply. The correction factor immediately changed, causing the factor to skew upwards of 1. I changed the value again, and once again the correction factor went up. I told them that that was exactly what I was talking about. The second the correction factor went up, fireworks started between Alex, Jeremy, and myself. I clearly entered a screen they didn't want me to change. Alex turned the weather station back on, but the correction factor wasn’t going back. Alex then blamed me for breaking his dyno computer. I told him I still had the expert on the phone, and asked the expert what to do to put it back. The expert told me to press “Apply”, and the second I hit that the barometric pressure went to 29.39 again and the correction factor went to .987. Alex told me that this isn't fair and that he had no idea the dyno could be manipulated in this way.

Next we began talking about retesting the OP's car to verify the Gintani/OE Tuning results. Alex was adamant to prevent this in fear that PowerChip would somehow try to steal Jeremy's ECU files. I informed Alex that for every simple problem there is usually a simple solution. I offered to let Jeremy be the only person to flash and return the car to stock, if that's what it would take show that we were not interested in the software currently programmed into the car.

Finally, I asked Alex to show me the OP's original dyno graphs and raw data. This is when another very sharp argument broke out between us. Alex refused to show me the OP's graphs or to reprint them in "Shootout" mode so they could be independently analyzed and verified. The argument grew so tense, that it became clear that I should leave.

After first challenging me to come to his dyno with my car and prove how manipulation could be done, Alex abruptly withdrew the invitation before the test even began. He refused to allow the test after he saw that I knew exactly how his dyno could be manipulated to achieve the perfect 10% gain found on the OP's results. He called me a liar and told me that on the phone that we had a mutual agreement only to change the “tacho” setting on the dyno. So after first challenging me to prove how his dynos could be manipulated, he backed out of the challenge, refused to allow it after he knew exactly what I was planning to do and knowing that it would exactly duplicate the artificial gain I saw on the OP’s dyno results. I asked Alex again to view the OP's results, and he said he didn’t know how to show the run conditions on the OP’s dyno runs. I told him that I had the expert on the phone that could tell us how to do it, and the argument escalated to the point that I given a clear indication to leave now.

I have no hard feelings toward Jeremy or Alex – Gintani or OE Tuning. My goal here is to keep this situation 100% professional and not in any way personal. The whole point of this is to verify the OP’s results – after all, he is certainly due a refund if they are accurate. I still cannot understand why Alex and Jeremy would not show me the dyno graphs on the computer. Also, the graphs that they retroactively posted do not even show the correction factor. The factors you see listed are live, not the conditions from when the runs were actually made. Also, you can export from dyno dynamics to a picture directly – for accuracy’s sake, I would prefer that over something that was copied and pasted into Paint (you can see lots of photo editing software on the taskbar of the dyno screenshots). It's worth mentioning, that 28 out of 28 dyno charts posted at OE Tuning blog, all of them were exported JPG files. For the purposes of this test only, the graphs presented here used screen captures and photo editing software to present the graphs.

I would like to renew my offer to the OP to allow his car to be independently tested on an independent dyno. In addition to all of the conditions in our previous offer, we would like to add the following to "sweeten the pot" and to ensure that Gintani's concerns of "file stealing" doesn't occur. If the OP does not own an OE Tuning EZ Flash, then we will buy one and he can keep it when the test is finished. He can load it with his current tune, and we will provide the stock factory tune to be used as part of the test. The car owner can operate EZ Flash on his own car to flash the OE Tune and his OEM tune, and we will never need to interact with his OE Tune ECU files. In the end he can keep the EZ Flash at our expense.

We encourage the OP to accept our offer for independent testing and do not understand how Gintani and/or OE Tuning could legitimately exert any pressure or influence on him to deny such a request. We believe the OP has the right to do anything he wants with his car, and if his tests were legitimate and independent in the first place (not sponsored or coerced), then no outside influence at Gintani or OE Tuning should get in the way.

This isn't about one car anymore, this is about every graph they have ever posted, if this one is fake why would the others be true?

I don't trust gintani, and I don't trust dyno dynamics

I don't think we need to take it that far. I'm more concerned about this particular graph and please let's focus on this graph only. I'm not interested in a flame war with Gintani about all of their dynos. I'm sure they make great products. Let's stick to the facts of this situation.

You can speculate elsewhere about their other dynos. I personally do not think they are inaccurate unless they exhibit the strange static gain like this one has.

I trust Dyno Dynamics. If the machine isn't used the way it is intended, that's not the machines fault. It's the operators fault. And I'm not even saying that Gintani modified anything. But their behavior Friday, Jeremy's post, and the fact that they will not show me the charts leads me to believe otherwise.... you can draw your own conclusion based on the evidence at hand.

I would like to see the car taken to a completely independant company, chosen by the owner for the dyno (ie. a company that does NOT tune BMW's). It is quite obvious that this will not be resolved without some sort of hurt feelings or fighting.

Yesterday I received a call from Alex at Gintani and he was clearly upset about this thread (which I wasn't even aware of yet). Alex offered that if I brought my car there, he would put it on the dyno and let me operate it to see if I could skew the numbers upward or downward. Alex told me that his dyno couldn’t be manipulated, but I would be welcome to “run his dyno” and show him how to do it. I accepted the challenge and made contact with a professional very well versed in Dyno Dynamics dynamometers, because I was unfamiliar with that software....

Mike Benvo

This has go to be one of the most interesting posts i'v read in a long time. I would like to see Gintani's response to this.

To those people: The probability of this "unusual" distribution occurring naturally is 0.003% (0.00003). In a world with few absolutes, I'll call this proof:

Where the tuners fall on that curve:

This is a VERY good example of data supporting the manipulation claim and certainly explains the original accusation. Probabilities at this level just do not occur everyday, but when they do happen, it should be investigated / researched to to understand "why" and if there is anything to be gained.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike@Powerchip

Finally, I asked Alex to show me the OP's original dyno graphs and raw data. Alex refused to show me the OP's graphs or to reprint them in "Shootout" mode so they could be independently analyzed and verified.

If true, this does not help Gintani's position, a veil of secrecy does not contribute to the community in a positive fashion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike@Powerchip

The whole point of this is to verify the OP’s results – after all, he is certainly due a refund if they are accurate. I still cannot understand why Alex and Jeremy would not show me the dyno graphs on the computer. Also, the graphs that they retroactively posted do not even show the correction factor. The factors you see listed are live, not the conditions from when the runs were actually made. Also, you can export from dyno dynamics to a picture directly – for accuracy’s sake, I would prefer that over something that was copied and pasted into Paint (you can see lots of photo editing software on the taskbar of the dyno screenshots). It's worth mentioning, that 28 out of 28 dyno charts posted at OE Tuning blog, all of them were exported JPG files. For the purposes of this test only, the graphs presented here used screen captures and photo editing software to present the graphs.

One possible way to resolve: should Gintani provide the raw data behind the dyno runs. I don't think there is anything proprietary to be found in a data dump.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike@Powerchip

I would like to renew my offer to the OP to allow his car to be independently tested on an independent dyno. In addition to all of the conditions in our previous offer, we would like to add the following to "sweeten the pot" and to ensure that Gintani's concerns of "file stealing" doesn't occur. If the OP does not own an OE Tuning EZ Flash, then we will buy one and he can keep it when the test is finished. He can load it with his current tune, and we will provide the stock factory tune to be used as part of the test. The car owner can operate EZ Flash on his own car to flash the OE Tune and his OEM tune, and we will never need to interact with his OE Tune ECU files. In the end he can keep the EZ Flash at our expense.

We encourage the OP to accept our offer for independent testing and do not understand how Gintani and/or OE Tuning could legitimately exert any pressure or influence on him to deny such a request. We believe the OP has the right to do anything he wants with his car, and if his tests were legitimate and independent in the first place (not sponsored or coerced), then no outside influence at Gintani or OE Tuning should get in the way.

The other way to resolve the issues, wild wild west style. Highly unlikely, but if it happens, it would be one for the ages.....

So 5 pages deep and we have data to support the fact that, "The probability of the gains mentioned in the OP's post are very unlikely from a mathematical perspective." With that being said, lets see the raw data (in numerical format not jpg) and let the experts figure it out.

The information about changing the correction factors has been out there for a long time. I personally posted it on this forum amongst many others.

No one cared. No one took note. I got a few PM's saying I'm just trying to cause problems and I left it there.

I have been trying to explain all of this to the masses for a long time.

It's quite simple - if a Dyno Dynamics dyno does not show correction factors then just ignore them. The power has been given to the public already and it's there for you to use.

Use shootout mode too because this will introduce other measures of control.

Once again I will say - this whole myth about Dyno Dynamics reading low is complete nonsense. There is no 'low reading' software.
The problem is with incorrect usage and training.

I have spent alot of my own time writing long write ups and they just get ignored. One even got deleted from this very forum. Can someone care to explain to me why that was done?

You see, there are a LARGE amount of tuners out there who own dyno's and who are actually honest. I can name quite a few of my direct competition who are like this.

It is in our interest to protect our line of work and actually stop devaluing horsepower!!!

As far as Gintani/OE go...... I would to believe the HP gains are real but the fact that this company and so many others HIDE the correction factors even after I have called them out on it so many times makes me wonder.

This next comment is not aggressive and non confrontational:

If you guys say your as good as you are then present the information like I do. Totally transparent with every correction factor displayed.

Why is it that specifically in the US every single company hides their correction factors?? When we all know they can be displayed with a click of a button??

This 'secret menu' is not a secret menu to any of the operators. It's clearly mentioned in the manual and the small card print outs that are placed under the keyboard.

It is there not to allow foul play but to allow user control incase the weather station breaks or if you want to turn it off an not use correction factors.... so set it to 1 and then do testing or whatever they need to. There could be multiple reasons which are not related to foul play.

The above only applies to the windows based software.

On the earlier DOS based systems that secret menu doesn't even exist. Rpi, Rogue engineering have this version.

On the DOS version you can do what the hell you like. A weather station is supplied but it's not linked to anything. It's down to the operator as to what he puts enters the values as and therefore you can have any correction factor you want!!

On the early software the only people that can catch out foul play is dyno dynamics themselves and that if and only if the correction factors are displayed.

If anyone (and I hope all!) is interested I can put up more information.

So 5 pages deep and we have data to support the fact that, "The probability of the gains mentioned in the OP's post are very unlikely from a mathematical perspective." With that being said, lets see the raw data (in numerical format not jpg) and let the experts figure it out.

There is a simpler way.

Do the tests again in shoot out mode with the correction variables displayed.

Make a print out of each run with variables as displayed by Gintani but this time include the MOST important variable of all..... the inlet temperature reading too.

Dyno Dynamics are very clever. They can catch out of the variables displayed actually belong to the graphs displayed. People have been caught quite badly in the past. Anyone thinking they can just go in and edit with photo editing software..... be aware!! You get caught doing that and it's curtains for you in the public eye.